Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Antoninus
No, I'm not. In 1615, these tribes hadn't been struck by the dread diseases yet. That would happen in the 1630s.

You did not give the dates of the population estimates in your initial post, thus I assumed they were from a later period. Also, the first epidemics entered the continent from the Gulf Coast in the mid 1500's, I do not find it unbelievable that the epidemics killed a large percentage in the St. Laurence valley before 1600. The initial Pilgrim colony at Plymouth was established on the ruins of a village that had been decimated by chicken pox (?) and abandoned.

Fairly sophisticated if you ask me.

The only major change was that there was more extensive exploitation of marginal crop land (marginal for corn-squash-beans) by grazing meat animals upon the land. If you want to convince me that Jefferson's agriculture was massively more productive than Cahokian, show that the addition of draft animals increases farm production (excess for sale off of the farm) by at least ten fold.

61 posted on 03/17/2006 6:22:58 AM PST by Fraxinus (Warning: Opinion may be less useful than it appears)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies ]


To: Fraxinus
Also, the first epidemics entered the continent from the Gulf Coast in the mid 1500's, I do not find it unbelievable that the epidemics killed a large percentage in the St. Laurence valley before 1600.

While you may be correct in your first supposition (that disease hit the Mississippian tribes earlier), your second is wrong. The Hurons, Neutrals, and Iroquois were not coastal tribes like whoever occupied the Plymouth site. They were also not strictly St. Lawrence Valley tribes. They were inland and didn't have their first contact with Europeans until the very late 16th century/early 17th century. When the first explorers and missionaries made their way out there, they found thriving towns and no trace of the dread diseases which would come later. It is upon their estimates that the population numbers are based.

There is plenty of excellent primary source material on this subject if you want it. The Voyages of Samuel de Champlain, The Jesuit Relations 1609-1673 as compiled by Reuben Gold Thwaites, and Sagard's History of Canada and the Voyages of the Recollect Fathers are all good sources for population numbers and agricultural information.
62 posted on 03/17/2006 6:43:12 AM PST by Antoninus (The only reason you're alive today is because your parents were pro-life.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson